Background :Postoperative respiratory failure (PRF, namely mechanical ventilation >48 hours) significantly affects morbidity and mortality in liver transplantation (LTx). Previous studies analyzed only one or two categories of PRF risk factors (preoperative, intraoperative or postoperative ones). The aims of this study were to identify PRF predictors, to assess the length of stay (LoS) in ICU and the 90-day survival according to the PRF in LTx patients. Methods: Two classification approaches were used: systematic classification (recipient-related preoperative factors; intraoperative factors; logistic factors; donor factors; postoperative ICU factors; postoperative surgical factors) and patient/organ classification (patient-related general factors; native-liver factors; new-liver factors; kidney factors; heart factors; brain factors; lung factors). Two hundred adult non-acute patients were included. Missing analysis was performed. The competitive role of each factor was assessed. Results: PRF occurred in 36.0% of cases. Among 28 significant PRF predictors at univariate analysis, 6 were excluded because of collinearity, 22 were investigated by ROC curves and by logistic regression analysis. Recipient age (OR = 1.05; p = 0.010), female sex (OR = 2.75; p = 0.018), Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD, OR = 1.09; p<0.001), restrictive lung pattern (OR = 2.49; p = 0.027), intraoperative veno-venous bypass (VVBP, OR = 3.03; p = 0.008), pre-extubation PaCO 2 (OR = 1.11; p = 0.003) and Model for Early Allograft Function (MEAF, OR = 1.37; p<0.001) resulted independent PRF risk factors. As compared to patients without PRF, the PRF-group had longer LoS (10 days IQR 7-18 versus 5 days IQR 4-7, respectively; p<0.001) and lower day-90 survival (86.0% versus 97.6% respectively, p<0.001). Conclusion: In conclusion, MELD, restrictive lung pattern, surgical complexity as captured by VVBP, pre-extubation PaCO 2 and MEAF are the main predictors of PRF in non-acute LTx patients.

Avolio, A. W., Gaspari, R., Teofili, L., Bianco, G., Spinazzola, G., Soave, P. M., Paiano, G., Francesconi, A. G., Arcangeli, A., Nicolotti, N., Antonelli, M., Postoperative respiratory failure in liver transplantation: Risk factors and effect on prognosis, <<PLOS ONE>>, 2019; 14 (2): e0211678-N/A. [doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0211678] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/141689]

Postoperative respiratory failure in liver transplantation: Risk factors and effect on prognosis

Avolio, Alfonso Wolfango;Gaspari, Rita;Teofili, Luciana;Spinazzola, Giorgia;Soave, Paolo Maurizio;Paiano, Gianfranco;Francesconi, Alessandra Gioia;Arcangeli, Andrea;Nicolotti, Nicola;Antonelli, Massimo
2019

Abstract

Background :Postoperative respiratory failure (PRF, namely mechanical ventilation >48 hours) significantly affects morbidity and mortality in liver transplantation (LTx). Previous studies analyzed only one or two categories of PRF risk factors (preoperative, intraoperative or postoperative ones). The aims of this study were to identify PRF predictors, to assess the length of stay (LoS) in ICU and the 90-day survival according to the PRF in LTx patients. Methods: Two classification approaches were used: systematic classification (recipient-related preoperative factors; intraoperative factors; logistic factors; donor factors; postoperative ICU factors; postoperative surgical factors) and patient/organ classification (patient-related general factors; native-liver factors; new-liver factors; kidney factors; heart factors; brain factors; lung factors). Two hundred adult non-acute patients were included. Missing analysis was performed. The competitive role of each factor was assessed. Results: PRF occurred in 36.0% of cases. Among 28 significant PRF predictors at univariate analysis, 6 were excluded because of collinearity, 22 were investigated by ROC curves and by logistic regression analysis. Recipient age (OR = 1.05; p = 0.010), female sex (OR = 2.75; p = 0.018), Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD, OR = 1.09; p<0.001), restrictive lung pattern (OR = 2.49; p = 0.027), intraoperative veno-venous bypass (VVBP, OR = 3.03; p = 0.008), pre-extubation PaCO 2 (OR = 1.11; p = 0.003) and Model for Early Allograft Function (MEAF, OR = 1.37; p<0.001) resulted independent PRF risk factors. As compared to patients without PRF, the PRF-group had longer LoS (10 days IQR 7-18 versus 5 days IQR 4-7, respectively; p<0.001) and lower day-90 survival (86.0% versus 97.6% respectively, p<0.001). Conclusion: In conclusion, MELD, restrictive lung pattern, surgical complexity as captured by VVBP, pre-extubation PaCO 2 and MEAF are the main predictors of PRF in non-acute LTx patients.
2019
AREA06 - SCIENZE MEDICHE
Pubblicazione su rivista con Impact Factor
Inglese
Articolo in rivista
Inglese
LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, RESPIRATORY COMPLICATION, RISK FACTORS, OUTCOME
Settore MED/18 - CHIRURGIA GENERALE
Settore MED/41 - ANESTESIOLOGIA
Public Library of Science
14
2
2019
Epub
e0211678
N/A
18
e0211678
Esperti anonimi
online
2019
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Avolio, A. W., Gaspari, R., Teofili, L., Bianco, G., Spinazzola, G., Soave, P. M., Paiano, G., Francesconi, A. G., Arcangeli, A., Nicolotti, N., Antonelli, M., Postoperative respiratory failure in liver transplantation: Risk factors and effect on prognosis, <<PLOS ONE>>, 2019; 14 (2): e0211678-N/A. [doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0211678] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/141689]
open
262
Avolio, Alfonso Wolfango; Gaspari, Rita; Teofili, Luciana; Bianco, G.; Spinazzola, Giorgia; Soave, Paolo Maurizio; Paiano, Gianfranco; Francesconi, Al...espandi
11
art_per_29
03. Contributo in rivista::Articolo in rivista, Nota a sentenza
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Avolio-Gaspari_PLOS_2019.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: ARTICOLO PRINCIPALE
Tipologia file ?: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 1.68 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.68 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10807/141689
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 15
  • Scopus 36
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 26
social impact